EDIT: I'm now in the LCMS :) My last comment below explains stuff. Original: DUDES. I'm Protestant. I've been HEAVILY discerning the Catholic Faith. The transparency of this episode really convicted me. I went to RCIA, not to convert but to really just learn. Every day though, I've been wrestling with the switch. I'm going connect in Cross the Tiber tonight, as soon as I finish this podcast. God bless you gents.
Please pray for me, I got excommunicated from my protestant church for defending Catholic doctrine (while not even explicitly aligning to the doctrine). I'm in the process of learning, I'd like to become Catholic if I find it to be the truth.
Dear Sotem, you are evidently brave and a person of integrity. I am so sorry for the difficulty you faced in the past. Sotem, may God bless you, grant you strength and wisdom, and aid you in your pilgrim journey.
As a devout Orthodox Christian I have been warring against much of the online Orthodox crowd for over a year now. They are very toxic and do not represent Orthodoxy at all. Great conversation. God bless you guys.
Greeting. Every group has their own toxic set of people. Whether it is Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, or non-Christians. I've seen plenty of Catholics (particularly of the "rad trad" mentality) act very poorly to others, just as I've seen Orthodox do the same. The best one can do is correct each other. Catholics and Orthodox especially. Both might have their disagreements, but hurling insults is not going to solve anything. It is more productive to charitably debate and dialogue over the issues.
thank you. I understand you very well, and I appreciate your love for unity and truth. May the Lord bless us all, catholic and orthodox, uniting our hearts and communities so that we may be one Church again, according to Lord's design.
I loved this. Lofton’s path is quite similar to mine except I started out as a Mormon, went to Catholicism left because of scandal to orthodoxy and am now going back to Catholicism. I have yet to be baptized but I’m working towards that. Any prayers would be appreciated.
We only have one baptism. If you were never baptized the first time then you never Catholic. If you were baptized by Orthodox priest we accept it but if you were never baptized by a Catholic or Orthodox priest, you need to get baptized as the Church doesn't recognize Mormon baptisms. Might be worth speaking with your priest about this.
Luke! There definitely is a lot of scandal right now in the church but we are on a blip of a 2000 year timeline of the Catholic Church. She has been hard times before and triumphed. If the RCC is the true church, that's all one needs to know. Praying for you now.
I’m Protestant at the time, but I love these two guys. I’ve learned so much about Catholic theology from Michael and so much about Catholic compassion and purity from Matt. I’m grateful for these guys. Thank you both for your ministries and faithfulness.
If you're in anything other than Voddie Baucham's church or in one of those rare independent conservative Anglican spinoff parishes, keep coming back here. Over and over and over again. Please keep coming back. And if you especially can find one of those Latin-speaking (or Eastern) Catholic Parishes, or, contrary to the title on here, an Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Parish, go to it, too. The time is not far when we will need to recommune anyway. It is not far at all. But Protestants will not be here to see it.
@@rizzogizzo6000 I'm with you. I'm not following what is being said with the first and the last comment. It seems like he's saying if you're a conservative-leaning Protestant, stay where you are?
My Mom who is a convert from new age, finished the Bible in 7 and half weeks during lockdown. She finished reading the Bible thrice in her 7 years of journey into Christianity.
Oh, dear God, please, yes, unity 🙏🙏🙏 Jesus prayed that we should be one. I see strengths and weaknesses on both sides and believe that we need each other for balance. I am falling between the two and not fully belonging in either. (technically I'm Catholic) Reunion would be like all my Christmasses came at once. 🙏🙏🙏
I was confirmed in May 2019 after a year or so of wrestling between the EOC and RCC; what finally settled it for me was the absolutely amazing Catholic community in my hometown, with a regular TLM and a fmr-Antiochian Orthodox priest who celebrates a Divine Liturgy under the jurisdiction of the UGCC. I still love to read books by Orthodox saints, have visited a Greek Orthodox monastery, and consider them to be my brothers and sisters in Christ, with whom I have nearly everything in common, in comparison to my Protestant family and friends. My father, who was all his life devoutly Protestant and a Reformed Baptist in the last few decades, he recently begun discerning Orthodoxy - praying for the intercession of St. Josaphat and St. Francis de Sales for his conversion!
@@CatholicHusband Are you a sedevacantist? Cause to call Orthodox not Christian is not in line with what the Church believes, especially V2. God bless.
@@CatholicHusband I understand your hesitancy but you’re suggestions are pretty faulty. They don’t completely reject the Immaculate Conception, they just don’t think it should be dogma(it’s a valid theological opinion in their eyes, yet not endorsed). They still pray for the dead and believes it helps with the purification process after death. They don’t believe 100% in the idea of a physical place of purgatory, but they believe the fundamentals of it. If Gregory Palamas is a polytheist, I guess Melkite Catholics are in heresy since they have him on their calendar(stannmelkitechurch.org/2021/03/18/can-palamism-and-thomism-be-reconciled/). The Orthodox Church even has valid sacraments, although considered illicit, per the Catholic Church. It would pretty weird to say that non-Christians polytheists have valid sacraments. They are our separated brothers in Christ, not polytheistic. They are wrong on Papal Supremacy, Infallibility, and the Filioque. But they still get a lot of things right. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses aren’t Christian, but the EO are. God bless.
@@CatholicHusband you need to be baptized, go regularly to the sacraments, have a life of prayer and repentance. Do works of mercy (charity, teach the ignorant, pray for the deceased, etc etc)
Baptized and raised methodist. Left the faith till God called me back in at 30. Struggled with denominations till I found calvinism. 8 years later and I understood less at the end than at the start and now I'm in RCIA thank God. Catholicism has really re-energized my thirst for the lord. I think I was getting way past luke warm. Listening to guys like James White praise themselves over and over again in between praise of the reformed saints. It got stale when I found out there was another side to that coin.
@@catholicguy2224 I think Tim Gordon is cool but when I heard him call things he disagreed with “gay” I decided to stop watching. There’s no room for irresponsible language like that from Catholics with a platform.
This interview was fantastic. One of my favorites. Matt, you’re a great interviewer! Thanks to Michael for sharing his struggles and journey to Catholicism.
The Orthodox Church helped me look at sin as a wound that needs healed, rather than what I had been taught (or as I interpreted) as a much scarier thought, which brought so much fear and dread about going to confession. This change of perspective led me to want to go to confession and look forward to going. I am still RC, but grateful to have had this change in my life, thanks to the Orthodox.
Thanks for sharing this, Barbara! There is so much we have to learn from our Orthodox brothers and sisters, including on the issue of legalism that you mentioned. I just go straight to their saints (half of each we share with them anyway) and leave the internet crowds aside. The Orthodox have such great sacred music and hymns and iconography and such a devotion to Our Blessed Mother that we can really enrich each other instead of trying to find fault with each other. I will never leave Rome, but I can certainly take what is good from Orthodoxy.
@@Athmoneusoh yes....ancestral sin makes so much more sense than original sin....and interestingly Benedict XVI removed Limbo & agreed unbaptised babies go straight to heaven.....that changes the concept of original sin. All good stuff.....except doing U-turns brings the magisterium into question. I feel conflicted and unmoored....falling between the lines. I 🙏 for reunion.
@@fatimahsharpe9113 Fatima - thanks for your comments. I don't see a distinction between ancestral sin and original sin. It is pretty obvious to me that some of the "differences" are more like language issues or differences in emphasis or even matters of plain old theological speculation. Some of our separated brethren unfortunately acquire and reinforce their identity through differentiation from the Catholic faith, but often these squabbles lack real substance and are more of a matter of thought style and they become a very artificial reason to raise walls within apostolic Christianity. Case in point is the limbo you mentioned. Limbo was never a dogma of the Church, but more of a theological hypothesis that had to do with soteriology, the nature vs. grace issue, etc. So our beloved Pope Benedict XVI did not "remove" anything that was part of the deposit of faith. He just stated that that theological speculation is not very useful. He just advanced the conversation within theology, providing his own opinion on the matter as another theologian, without changing Catholic dogma or binding the faithful to accept his view. You can still be a faithful Catholic and legitimately accept the idea of limbo. It is for God to say who gets to go to heaven. All we can do is pray for the salvation of all.
Michael, I can see your concern for your family. The anchor for me was the Eucharist, our Blessed Mother, and the Magisterium. So sorry you didn’t find an alternative Catholic parish.
Holy cow. I've never heard so many names and sources cited (by Michael) in such a short span. He dropped position after position of the different groups. A lot of head-scratchers, but still: Amazing.
When confronted with several Catholic priest at my parish that said shocking things and contradicted what is clearly in the Catechism, I went with the Catechism. Stay faithful and let God sort it out. Our new pastor is great so far.
EPHRAIM THE SYRIAN “[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).
@Lukas M definitely! But the Orthodox Church makes claims that the Bishop of Rome never had primacy over the Church. Well, there favorite Saints believed so.
@@rizzogizzo6000 The Orthodox Church doesn't deny that there was papal primacy in the first millennium of Church history. All bishops are successors of Peter
@@thomashanson7550 well it varies in certain Orthodox camps. Their view of papal primacy is more so that Peter was the first among equals as a mediator or mouth piece of the Church but not as first in charge over the Church, like the right hand to Jesus. But this was the view of a lot of the anti-Nicene fathers. To believe Peter didn’t have authority over the other bishops, would by default, be a rejection of papal primacy. Peter was either over the Church in authority or first in rank but no authority over the other Bishops.
Good grief, this was good...I am a cradle Catholic, and I struggled with my faith for so many reasons. Both Matt and Michael have helped me a lot not giving in to despair and retain the faith which was handed down to me by my parents and grandparents. I am struggling with a lot of terrible sins and a general sense of lukewarmness, despair and accedia, but folks like you are helping me not to go insane (as many sedevacantists go) or aloof (like many "base" catholics must be feeling like now).
Just few clarifications about Orthodoxy, Regarding his argument about not having a Pope and thus not having microdogmas about every single aspects of his life, In Orthodoxy you must follow your spiritual father, during confession he is like talking to Christ, whatever he says that is what you must do, he has the authority to tell you if you should fast or not and give you directions about everything. And you simply must do that. It's called "ypakoi" (obedience) Obviously history has shown that this is a vastly superior system because we don't have corrupted Popes changing dogmas and ridiculing the entire Church with their opinions. Orthodox Churches are self governed, if a priest changes dogma or says things heretical things not backed from the apostles or saints like: " "arsenokites are not in s State of sin" This doesn't affect the entire church like with Catholicism The priest will simply be removed and replaced. But with the Pope history has spoken, very heretical scandalous words have come from ex cathedral Micro differences in ways of doing things is 100% ok in orthodoxy because we are saved by grace after all, not legalism or our own actions. We must produce Good fruits in the name of Christ not to be saved by them, So the legalistic approach is anathema to us. Anathema
@@SanctusPaulus1962 listen brother, I don't want to get into online argumentation with a fellow Christian, nor scandalize you over your faith, May our Lord show mercy on all of us
@@SanctusPaulus1962I'll give you an example....not exactly scandalous....but it's enough to make you raise an eyebrow. Benedict XVI scrapped Limbo and said unbaptised babies go straight to heaven. Great ! Except that drastically changes the concept of original sin. Good 😃 But in the face of such U-turns how reliable is our magisterium??
I’ve been strongly considering Catholicism for a while and am currently in RCIA. But I recently began considering Orthodoxy. I def agree with Orthodox theology on some things compared to Latin/Western theology. But I almost immediately began to see the problems inherent in Orthodoxy.
In the end it is to be expected that we cannot comprehend every single teaching of 2000 years. This is why it all goes back to the magisterium and the pope. If you see evidence for the pope being legitimate, you have to be catholic. And the pope is such a clearcut case
@@Someone_in_the_world_currently they are in the middle of their own schism between Russia and other churches, they don't have coherent teaching - example - question on Filioque - some orthodox don't see a problem, some see heresy.
@stopaskingmynamegoogle That is true about Catholicism being an ethnic church of immigrants in America and it continues to be for immigrants but it has adapted well in America because while individual parishes may have an ethnic flair in totality that represent every ethnicity and every language a Catholic and universal representation. Where as in Orthodoxy you have Russian orthodox and Greek Orthodox discouraging their flock from attending each other’s church’s. A Hispanic Catholic can easily attend an Italian ethnic church without scandal. A Greek going to an Russian church good luck with that.
@stopaskingmynamegoogle I don't deny there's truth to that and the fact that most popes have been Italian. Thank God for Vat 2 and the changes that have been made for the past 50 years . I do like Patriarch Bartholomew. He might be the closet to Pope Francis in the Orthodox world.
@stopaskingmynamegoogle There's a big difference between parishes organized on ethnic lines and whole churches composed of one ethnic group. The Italian, Polish, Irish parishes in the same city were all under the same bishop.
From conception the Church was an OFFICIAL sect within Judaism. If you read Acts 1 and if you are familiar with Halakhah Law you will immediately notice that the Church is a legal entity WITHIN Judaism. There are 3 requirements which are met. Notice that there are 120 members in this synagogue. Why is this important? It is the exact number of persons in the Halakhah regulations to form a full fledged synagogue. Next according to Halakhah regulations there must be a "beit din" (Hebrew court) formed. We see that there is a beit din and it draws lots and Matthias a disciple is chosen to take over Judas bishopric (episkopen). So two of the three requirements are met. The third requirement is that there must be a nasi (prince/temporal) and ab ( father/spiritual) appointed. Curiously Peter is filling both these positions in this beit din. Why? In 190 BC the Kohan Gadol (high priest office) fell into apostasy and beit din gadol cast a vote of no confidence splitting the two offices of the kohan gadol into the "nasi" and the "ab" within the beit din gadol. However, in this new beit din which is actually a beit din gadol (70 disciples) Christ has placed His confidence in Peter by presenting him the Keys to the temple and bringing the two offices back together the way it originally was. The pope has both temporal and spiritual powers. Peter is the prince of the apostles and the pope (Pope meaning papa - meaning father) as you see even today the pope is both nasi and the ab in Catholicism. Christ appointed Peter as His steward with the keys as per Isaiah 22 vs 19-24. It doesn't mean the other apostles (successors) were/are sidelined, they had/have an equal place, Peter is just First amongst equals. In the davidic kingdoms there was always an al-bayith (steward), that is Peters role. First book of Kings lists all the Kings and it always has the royal steward/vizier listed next to the King as well because in the absence of the King he was in charge of the Kingdom. The steward is given the sash/robes/keys to the temple because the role is also a priestly role. (Rashi the Jewish sage writes a commentary on the priestly role of the steward/vizier and the keys are the keys of the temple and government.) Jesus instituted a new temple, reinstated the Melchizedek priesthood in a new davidic kingdom and placed Peter as the steward and the (rock/Cepha). The Eben Shetia the foundation rock of Solomons Temple which the ark lay upon) as in the Talmud, Mishnah and Baraita - the Jews believed that this Eben Shetia rock was placed by God's hand during creation at the very spot that the holy of holies of Solomons Temple was built and from this spot the rest of creation was spread. Jesus by His hand placed the rock/Peter/Cepha in the middle of the pagan Roman Empire and from there this small “cult” destroyed paganism and installed christianity in its place by the power of Christ and it spread throughout the Roman Empire eventually becoming the State religion (a new creation). In the Talmud it talks about the keys to the First Temple which in the midst of being destroyed the young priests took the keys up a mountain and shouted to God to forgive them for not being able to protect the Temple and they threw the keys towards the sky and a palm reached down and grabbed the keys. So the keys of the temple is not just symbolic. Jesus knows the Second Temple will be destroyed, He presents the keys to Peter. What is your ultimate authority that determines who is a heretic? The church fathers? But they don’t all agree on everything. The councils? How do you know that your Church (I’m assuming Eastern Orthodoxy) has all of the councils? How do you know your side didn’t break away from the Church that still possesses the rock of Peter? Eastern Orthodox disagree with each other on a lot of things, and so do Catholics obviously too. But Catholics at least can say they have something to turn to that has the final say. Orthodox don’t have that luxury. There are current schisms in Orthodoxy. If they become permanent, how do you know which side you should stick to? Just a few questions to ponder.
Love this! These guys are arguably the two heavyweights in Catholic TH-cam! All we need now is Bishop Barron and Fr. Mike Schmitz and we’ll have the Catholic Avengers 😂
Agree with all the aforementioned names with the exception of Bishop Barron. With respect to the Bishop, but he is a modernist whose infamous statement “dare we hope….” Concerning the idea that Hell is empty, is a massive error in his theological reasoning and mortal sin to deny magisterial church teaching.
@@neroresurrected the church never infallibly taught that someone is in hell, the "dare we hope" is not a straight up contradiction to Church teaching, it's a discouraged but acceptible position to have.
Loften is my Hero he convinced me to the go Catholic Church I literally have the exact position as he has..I think a lot of Protestant go EO first because of our strong anti Catholic bias
Exactly. They are going from protestantism to proto-protestantism, to avoid to submit to the Rock of the Church, out of pride and rebellion. They are also temperamentally more suited and totally prepared for the internal in-fighting among the Orthodox.
@@Athmoneus it’s hard the dust and the fog of war is so intense against the church ..when I was convinced of the Catholic Church as the true church I was kicking and screaming…But finally it all made sense..My blessed Mother and her prayers and the the Rosary 📿
It is easy to be united when you only had one Patriarch out of the Pentarchy ;) I find the Russian / Greek argument comforting, very much in the spirit of Paul, Peter and Barnabas. Christ's Church has internally argued and reconciled over and over from the beginning.
Nice interview. I identify with Michael....I myself went from Pentecostal to different permutations of Baptist, to Reformed / Presby, to Lutheran.....and now I m looking at RC as the True Church. My family thinks I've changed too many times too but like Michael I arrived to the next stage by study. I see the Solas as unworkable, so I'm nearly ready. I plan on being married next year so that enters into the decision too. Michael, if you want to connect I'd love to talk for a bit.
Been interested in converting and becoming a catholic. Ive watched several of your videos but I just caught on that your name is Matt, I always thought it was Aquinas!! XD But now I realize your podcast is named after Thomas Aquinas, Ha!
I would have to agree with Michael on this issue on "guitar liturgy". It's mostly a western modernist issue, a United States issue. Basing from the Philippines(a south east asian country with some infused western ideology) most of these modern concerns of using instruments aren't really an issue. The guitar has been used solemnly in our parish, and it's truly beautiful. Most of these issues raised seem to be culture specific, not necessarily theologic nor dogmatic As michael has raised, dogma has already been addressed by the Church on this one. The problem is just Americans are too entitled to seek obedience 😂 the nature is to disobey and to question, rather than to seek and understand before jumping into conclusions Two cents!
The guitar liturgy took sway in the West immediately after V2, but because of their distance from Rome, it took some time to reach Asia and Africa. All the gregorian chant or hymns of old were subsequently replaced by clapping and protestantized hymns where all that is said is "we praise you, we thank you". Some parishes are luckier than others, because their priests held firm and did not allow the Mass to become a theatre production. God bless those Asian and African priests. You are right about these issues being culture specific. If you take a look at India, the land of St. Francis Xavier and St. Thomas, you will see inculturation in full swing now. Gone is the Paschal candle, there are hindu and pagan lamps everywhere. Old timers who resisted receiving the Holy Eucharist from Nuns and laity were not looked upon very kindly. Similar stories can be found in African countries. Pray for Holy Mother Church to come back to Tradition. Ave Maria.
In Portugal they keyboard is mostly used to sound like an organ. I saw a parish where they played the violin. All very pious and the chanting is traditional sounding, on feast days usually theres singing in portuguese but the refrains in latin. More agitated music tends to be done by the charismatic movement or the youth groups. It depends. I agree with you, its cultural. Our Catholic Church is universal, we are from so many different countries...i see several people only taking communion from the Priest. As i do.
Respect and love to all Catholics. Just like you, I believe that every person who sincerely seeks the truth will be guided by God. May I tell why I choose to be in Orthodoxy. Really don't want you to think that I'm an angry Orthodox who came to teach you how to live, or agitate, or anything like that. I just thought about those things which found important and wanted to share. 1. In Catholicism, people usually receive communion with only bread. With bread and wine only for the clergy. But in the Bible, Christ commands the communion with bread and wine, and Catholic priests do it with bread and wine, but other people only with bread. Why? Why there is difference between clergy and laity, when Christ clearly commanded us to partake with both bread and wine? So disciples did and the early Church. Why do Catholic priests defund their people from communion with the blood of Christ, in contrary to the Gospel? So you can be a Catholic and never in your live take communion with Blood of Christ. 2. In Catholicism, there is a dogma of the inerrancy of the Pope when he speaks "ex cathedra". This contradicts The Holy Scripture saying that there is no-one sinless besides God Himself. The idea that someone (even a monk or bishop) becomes inerrancy because he was chosen by the council of cardinals (same sinful people), and now standing in the pulpit and saying only the truth just contradicts the Holy Scriptures. Moreover, to demand that all Christians must take everything what this man says as the truth. Sorry, really don't want to offend or sound rude, but this dogma is clearly heresy. What if one day the Pope tells you from the cathedra that he's god himself? Will you believe him according to that dogma of the inerrancy of the Pope? Catherine of Siena (Catholic saint of 14th century) said, "Even if the Pope were satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom." What is this if not heresy? Robert Bellarmine, another Catholic saint, said that if the Pope called the sin a virtue and called the lie the truth, then we should have listened to him (sorry, don't have the exact quote, but you can check it). Can you see what things it leads to? In Orthodox Church there is nothing like that, because it's stated that everyone, even the Patriarch, can be mistaken. 3. The dogma in Catholicism that Virgin Mary herself was immaculately conceived. This is not said anywhere in the Bible, nor in the Sacred Tradition. 4. The teaching in Catholicism that a person can have merits before God. What merits can a person have before God? In Orthodoxy (as far as I know), people are saved through the grace of God, their humility and repentance. A person should do good deeds and forgiveness, because he himself asks God for mercy, grace and forgiveness. Therefore, he must treat others in the way he asks God to do unto him. But this is not a merit before God and a means to salvation (as the Catholic Church says, as far as I know). In Orthodoxy, virtues are valued only because humility comes through them. 5. Filioque. According to Orthodox teaching Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (Nicene Creed). In Catholicism it's added, "and from the Son". In Bible Christ clearly says that Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:" (John 15:26) Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, and the Son sends Him unto disciples. That is what Jesus Christ says in (John 15:26). Some people say, "But the Father and the Son are one, therefor Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son". But according to that logic they could've also said that Holy Spirit proceed from Holy Spirit Himself, or as the Father and the Son are one, that the Father is born from Virgin Mary and Holy Spirit, which would be complete nonsense. So why add "and from the Son" when Christ Himself says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father? Some people point at: "And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:" (John 20:22) This place (John 20:22) is not about proceeding the Holy Spirit in eternity. It’s about sending Holy Spirit through the Son from the Father, which happens in time, not in eternity. The Son sends Holy Spirit from the Father. Holy Spirit comes to the disciples through the Son from the Father, but Holy Spirit doesn't proceed from the Son, He Proceeds from the Father. Bible is very clear about it.
Really hope that I didn't offend anyone or said anything bad, just wanted to share with those things, becasue found them important. Wish the best to everyone!
Sorry your post is way too long, didn't read it all. Point 1, We fully receive both body and blood of Our Lord in either bread or wine. It's not practical to give wine to a few hundred in congregation. Many wouldn't want to receive from the same chalice that 100 others have used. I have received both kinds in a small setting with 20/30 people.
A couple areas of disagreement on your points: 2) "Ex Cathedra" doesn't mean sinless. The Apostles did great signs in Christ's name despite being sinners. In addition, when you say, " Moreover, to demand that all Christians must take everything what this man says as the truth," you are not accurately portraying the Catholic position. The pope does not create dogma and we don't claim that he does. The ability to speak ex cathedra is a separate charism from his everyday pastoral teaching, which is not infallible. 3) Mary is "full of Grace" prior to her accepting the call to be the mother of Jesus; therefore, she was either conceived in a sinless state, or redeemed in the womb and born in a sinless state (St. Thomas' position). You are right: the term "immaculate conception" is not in Scripture, but neither is Trinity or hypostatic union, beliefs you no doubt espouse. However, Mary's sinlessness is espoused early in Sacred Tradition, and I can provide references if you'd like. 4) We can merit Grace from God because He chooses it to be so. Without giving a long explanation, look at the Roman Centurian in Acts ch. 10: God sends St. Peter to the Roman man because God heard the man's prayer AND saw his charity to the poor. This was before his baptism. This shows us that both our Faith (Cornielus' prayer) and our actions (his generosity to the poor) can garnish (i.e. merit) favor with God. When St. Paul teaches against works-based salvation, he is doing so in the context of the old Jewish law. 5) Filioque: This is honestly not a big deal to the everyday believer. It was a theological disagreement that was capitalized upon for political machinations and is now used today by Orthodox to try to discredit the authority of Catholocism. One could go his entire life, be faithful to Christ, attain Salvation, and never know the theological disagreement surrounding the filioque. Now some questions for Orthodoxy and its lack of central authority: 6) How can you be certain as to the meaning of Scripture without an interpretive authority? 7) How do you reconcile disagreement between and amongst patriarchs? 8) How do you address contemporary issues such as contraception, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, etc. without authority in either Tradition or the contemporary time? In other words, what is your system for resolving novel problems?
@@jaqian Hey, thanks. It's all good, the comment happened to be too long indeed. But how can you fully receive both body and blood by only one kind, when in fact you receive only bread-body? In Gospels Christ gives both bread and wine to the disciples and says clearly to receive them. How come that it's okay not to follow Christ's words and invent something different: to give only bread to people claiming that by body they also receive blood? Where does that belief follow from? Christ gave both bread and wine to the disciples, not only bread, right? To say something like, “let’s just receive one kind, only bread, and we will believe that we received blood too” - is a substitution of Christ’s teaching with people’s verbal invention, which follows from nowhere. In Orthodoxy they receive communion “by two kinds” and have no problems, it’s practical enough. Christ’s body and blood are so important that people are ready to go to the edge of the world to recieve it. I’m saying it not to criticize Catholics, not at all, there are so many kind and honest Christians among Catholics. Just can’t understand how it is possible to substitute such an important Christian sacrament in contrary to what Christ taught and showed.
@@phoult37 Hey, thank you for your reply. 3. Trinity is based on the Bible: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." (1st John, 5:7) "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" (Mattew, 28:19) And the hypostasis too (for example: John 15:26, John Chapter 1) Just don’t see how from the fact that Mary is full of Grace follows that She was or redeemed in the womb? Then why God didn’t redeemed all other people from sin the same way? Then why the sacrifice of Christ needed? No doubts that Virgin Mary is the greatest Saint ever lived. Maybe it’s okay to believe privately that she was immaculately conceived, but it’s not right to make it as a dogma and force it on people, because it’s a very disputable thing, not based or mentioned in the Saint Scripture. Many people believe that She is the greatest Saint but was conceived like all other people. Why is it wrong or bad? 2. I didn’t misrepresent it because wrote in the beginning, “when he speaks “ex cathedra”, I was talking in that context. The Catholics don’t believe that the Pope is sinless or never mistaken. But as you don’t believe that the Pope is sinless or infallible in general, why would you believe that he becomes infallible when he stands on the cathedra to speak? On what Biblical teaching is it based? I believe that it’s completely unbiblical dogma. You’re right that God can do great signs and miracles through sinful people, like the Apostles, Saints, no doubts. But you can’t do it by demand. You can’t just take a Bishop and say, “We choose this man, now he’s our Pope, so he has a charisma and what he says from cathedra is all true”. It’s an unbiblical thing. Christ didn’t give that authority to people to do such things, to endow someone with the ability of guaranteed inerrancy. What if the Pope will stand "ex cathedra" and start teaching completely heresy and obviously wrong things? Will you follow it or will you agree then that "inerrancy ex cathedra" doesn't work? 4. It’s actually a very big deal, because “Filioque” changes Christ’s words, Who said clearly that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:" (John 15:26) "Filioque" misrepresents Trinity changing Christ's words. To say that it’s not a big deal for everyday believers, isn’t true. It teaches wrong things about Trinity. Everyday believers read Nicene Creed every morning and on every liturgy, so it should be correct. Why should everyday believers read not correct Nicene Creed but a changed one with unbiblicaly changed words which contradict what Christ said about the Holy Spirit? So it's not right to put blame on Orthodox, who stand for the Creed to be according to the Christ's words about the Holy Spirit. On your questions (as far as I know about Orthodoxy, just so you know that I might be mistaken on many things): "How can you be certain as to the meaning of Scripture without an interpretive authority?" Only the consent of the holy fathers (Church Fathers). If most of the holy fathers agree on it, then it is true, becasue they are led by the Holy Spirit. There isn't such a thing like authority there. One holy father can be mistaken, but not most of them. So need to read the Scripture and check the interpretation with the holy fathers. "How do you reconcile disagreement between and among patriarchs?" Nohow. Just pray so that they came to an agreement. Just like the Apostles came to agreement on Jerusalem council (Acts, Chapter 15). The idea that there can be one Bishop who can always unmistakably reconcile disagreements, we found it as wishful thinking. Better to have a disagreement which can be solved later, then be led by one decision of one person, which can be wrong. And if something very important, need to call a council. "How do you address contemporary issues such as contraception, abortion, euthanasia homosexuality without authority in either Tradition or the contemporary time" All local Orthodox Churches are in agreement on the most of mentioned things. Abortions, homosexuality - just need to open the Bible. Not trying to reject the Bible in favour of someone's personal authority. The disagreements usually not inside the Church, but between the Church and some secular groups. There are documents such as "The social concepts of Orthodox Church", where they make statements on those contemporary issues. I don't know about any of major things where different local Orthodox Churches had much different opinions on those things. Even if they had disagreements, it wouldn't be such a big problem as in the case if they all are led by a mistaken decision of one person.
@@ronrontall6370 Yes ur right bro this schismatics can't understand that. God distroyed schismatic Greeks in the hands of tuks for their schism and blasphemy 😝😝😝😝
I went to Eastern Orthodox over catholism, when we left protestantism because of the fruit. There’s a lack of combat, a humility and meekness, that is in the East, that I find nowhere else. We enter our faith without a fight against anyone of anything. The liturgy changes you. Not studying, or arguing a point/points. This is the faith Christ spoke about, I find a true love for Christ I have never ever know…. It boils down to fruit.
@menotyou1161 but that isn’t a logically sound way to reason. If a Buddhist is virtuous is that enough reason to become Buddhist? A combination of sound logic and good fruit is necessary to determine the truth.
@@buckarooben7635 well, I believe the Buddhist don’t have the Holy Spirit indwelling, and as such? Are not capable of growing in the fruit of the Spirit. But can have other spirits indwelling. So we can argue away, but ultimately the question remains. What is the fruit from the East? And what is the fruit of the west? Winning an argument means nothing. Growing in humility is everything
I have left the Catholic church and joined the eastern Orthodox church. I can't get into issues on comments, but too many catholics are trying to explain things away etc. .
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM “Jesus said to Peter, ‘Feed my sheep’. Why does He pass over the others and speak of the sheep to Peter? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir. For this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the others. And also to show him that he must have confidence now that his denial had been purged away. He entrusts him with the rule [prostasia] over the brethren. . . . If anyone should say ‘Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?’, I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that see but of the whole world.” (Homilies on John, 88.1). John knew Peter’s position amongst the universal Church and the world. And John is one of the Eastern Church’s main Saints. There are a bunch of other quotes but they knew Peters seat and the place of Rome in the Church. I was considering EOC and never considered RCC. But I’m my study of the EOC, I’m know outside of Rome and approaching her gates. History is on Romes side as far as Church history goes. There’s no way around it.
What s going on in the USA with the Church? So many complaints about modernism. Am I just not well theologically informed to notice it here or am I spoiled with my dedicated Opus Dei priests who answer my questions and help me flourish spiritually. Well I m not flexing but I stay in an Opus Dei student study center, things are different here LOL. I m just grateful to have some good people around me .
Yes, you are just totally spoiled but please enjoy it, and please thank God for this blessing and may you be able to help others too, that you will find on your path. Laudetur Iesus Christus! San Josemaria and Blessed Alvaro del Portillo pray for us!
I take no pleasure in Lofton representing Catholics. He engages his audience in the most uncharitable way. There are times he loses it because people in the chat bring up a point that could poke a hole in his argument. You can see the comments on his page. Unless the person is in complete agreement with him, he is smug and passive-aggressive. His lack of humility to consider that there is room for differing opinions on some issues. I finally unsubscribed from his channel.
The virtue of humility is not apparent in his behavior, for certain. He's not even intellectually impressive. He's just like a librarian assistant. He knows how to source material and parrot it. But he does not apply that knowledge appropriately, judiciously or without bias. Funny how his nuance always comes down on a predictable Pollyannaish side of an issue.
When I came back to the Church after being a Protestant for 40 years, I didn't want to feel like I was just church hopping to another Protestant denomination. That's why I ended up at a parish with a Latin Mass 25 miles from my house rather than the Parish that was 2 miles and another that was 10 miles away.
This seems less like an interview and more of a therapy for Michael Lofton. Not a bad thing tho, it just means the interview is really good, lol. I really appreciate Michael Lofton posting a lot of videos regarding his journey to solving many ecclesiological problems that I and many people share. Praise to God.
I was Catholic for several months, then left for Orthodoxy, where I'm a catachumen. I was married long before becoming Catholic, and my wife is an atheist. She was going to divorce me because I didn't want to have sex without contraception, and because I said that if her gay brother got married, or if our child turned out gay and got married, I wouldn't be able to attend their ceremony. If I attended a gay "wedding" or contracepted, in order to save my marriage, expressing my objections, praying for my wife, and confessing it, could I be forgiven? I really miss Catholicism but I can't live with destroying my marriage and my child's life, and it would be 100% MY fault, not my wife's. We weren't religious when we married/had a baby and she didn't sign up for that.
Maybe save those conversations for if that ever happens to you. My partner is also not interested in faith or church. I have to constantly remind myself to be meek and influenced by my behavior and not through words.
That is a horrible situation but you cannot have your faith compromised by worldly affairs. This is equal to denying christ before men, causing him to deny you before the father. If you have true faith in the lord, you accept this as a trial of your faith, and trust god to do the rest
Bro I'm literally crying right now. I have very similar experience but I'm only on the 1st stage of what he experienced. There are so many conflicts when I converted to Catholicism (from Pentecostalism). I'm also attracted to Eastern Orthodoxy because I do not feel welcome in the Catholic church, I dont feel I belong here. My reason for converting to RCC is because of intellectual reasons and desire for universal truth and consistency in the church.
My piece of advice: do not force yourself to stick a given parish if it is leading nowhere. Try other ones in the vicinity, if available I'd advise you give a try to a tridentine community! I keep you in my prayers, hold fast to the end to seize the victor's crown!
Dear Nico, I am sorry to know that you haven't felt like a part of the Catholic Church. It's unfortunate that you did not see hospitality your parish. But may I encourage you now, and seek that you slowly find a small group of committed Catholics, who are also hospitable and caring. I suspect with a healthy community life, you may find yourself healed and at home. May God bless you and aid you in your journey.
I never found community in the catholic church. I suggest you make your own community. What do i mean? Contact like minded catholics through going to retreats and church events. Nourish those acquaintances and friendships. Parishes arent necessarily communities unless youre in a village (european experience here)
Jesus did not say, it will be easy! I stopped taking my kids to local church because the priest was too liberal and my kids found find too traditional than priest!
I’d say someone who is lovely and direct to the point in the absolution. If he retains the absolution (which is very, very, very rare), then someone who can respectfully explain the reasons. Who doesn’t act like throwing stones at the faithful nor act like indulgently towards sin itself. I’ve heard of priests that said to some people on confession that things are not sins, meaning a “bad confessor” endorses moral relativism. But a moralist and a stone-thrower would never make for a good confessor. Actually I see many people assuming the sacrament of confession/reconciliation as a synonym of spiritual direction, which it is not. Of course the good confessor should or must give good spiritual advice when needed, but those are occasional interventions. I see many people today thinking the priest should act as a psychologist and a counselor, but that’s not even how spiritual direction should go. If you need, you should ask the priest for spiritual direction. Well, on confessions specifically, the more objective, both gentle and firm but always loving and pious the priest is, always the better. That’s my opinion at least. Welcome home! God bless your path always, sister!
Just sitting down to watch this video. Watching the hand fill the pint, I looked across to my peppermint crisp Oak milk and pondered my dilemma- Oak or beer, Oak or beer - hmm, why not both!
I would strongly recommend you to watch Tim Gordon on this issue too. He even says he (as a more traditionalist Catholic) blamed the Council for many things and got surprises when he went to the very documents of it - so the plain “refusal” (as if it were an option) is nothing but an obstinate position maybe.
@@brunot2481 I have so much respect for Tim! Tim and TM got me back into the Church in 2019....their time together on TNT was instrumental in that decision. Tim was my favorite, hands-down. I had no idea that he held that position and then changed his mind. I need to really re-think my own position. My mind is kind of blown after watching this....Michael's story resonates strongly with me.
@nikki venable: Sadly, Vatican II is filled with modernism. But the Church will come back to Tradition and the finger pointing b/n Novus Ordo and TLM will cease.
Thank you for this show. The only commented I was disappointed when you said the Trads are not friendly, seeming angry. Perhaps it appears that way to your own personal experience, but Ive been to enough Trad masses and I find parishioners so grateful, prayerful, friendly. Anyway, you cannot generalize. I am happy you found the Parish you feel at home with the Byzatine mass. I wouldnt hesitate to to go to traditional or Byzantine. Pax+
It seems Michael is wrong on Communion in the hand: "Pope St. Leo the Great (440-461), already in the fifth century, is an early witness of the traditional practice. In his comments on the sixth chapter of the Gospel of John, he speaks of communion in the mouth as the current usage: “One receives in the mouth what one believes by faith” [2]. The Pope does not speak as if he were introducing a novelty, but as if this were a well established fact. A century and a half later, but still three centuries before the practice ( according to the popular account reviewed above) was supposedly introduced, Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604) is another witness. In his dialogues (Roman 3, c. 3) he relates how Pope St. Agapito performed a miracle during the Mass, after having placed the Body of the Lord into someone’s mouth. We are also told by John the Deacon of this Pope’s manner of giving Holy Communion. These witnesses are from the fifth and the sixth centuries. How can one reasonablely say that communion in the hand continued as the official practice until the tenth century? [...] So St. Basil(330-379)says clearly that to receive Communion by one’s own hand is only permitted in times of persecution or, as was the case with monks in the desert, when no deacon or priest was available to give It. “It is not necessary to show that it does not constitute a grave fault for a person to communicate with his own hand in a time of persecution when there is no priest or deacon” (Letter 93, our emphasis). The text implies that to receive in the hand under other circumstances, outside of persecution, would be a grave fault [3]. [...] Thus the Council of Rouen, which met in 650, says, “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or laywomen but only in their mouths.” The Council of Constantinople which was known as in trullo (not one of the ecumenical councils held there) prohibited the faithful from giving Communion to themselves (which is of course what happens when the Sacred Particle is placed in the hand of the communicant). It decreed an excommunication of one week’s duration for those who would do so in the presence of a bishop, priest or deacon." communion-on-the-tongue.org/articles/009.html
I was introduced to Michael Lofton when he introduced when he interviewed a Lutheran pastor. Might be the unintended outcome but he really helped Lutheranism solidify in my life.
Stay WITHIN the Church and do your just diligence of prayer, fasting and receiving of Sacramdnts. Read Cdl W.Brandmuller’s writings on the German past Synodal processes since 1975.
Many Catholics I’ve seen on TH-cam seem to think “oikonomia" is some kind of cop-out from legal definitions. I think this fails to appreciate the full depth of “oikonomia.” This word is exchanged with “stewardship" in the Bible. It means "household management" and designates the "divine plan of salvation" in the New Testament. The same Greek word (oikonomia) is used both for Christ's "plan" in Ephesians and for ministerial stewardship, and it’s cited as being "an imitation of God's love for man" in other orthodox works. Thus, “housekeeping” in the church is not MERE housekeeping. It is salvation as God sees fit, at the bishop-level, where St. Ignatius says “there is the church.”
Mr.Lofton talks about choosing a religion like it is choosing a gym. From Reformation to Roman Catholicism, after he even (in his words) considered atheism, then Eastern Orthodoxy, and again Roman Catholicism.
Thank you for sharing your marriage difficulties in the Church. The mixed messages that do no align with church teaching are quite harmful to family and marriage.
In the Orthodox Church we don't rebaptise people, we baptise them! If you are talking about rebaptism, then this means wherever you came from, that place already had valid priesthood. The term rebaptism implies two different and separate and valid priesthoods. So if you come from a place with valid priesthood, why bother with Orthodoxy at all? What's the point! As for the chrismation on people without Orthodox baptism, that is only harming those chrismated (cause they remain unbaptised) and the Orthodox clerics who carelessly do the service of the Lord They who asked you to get an Orthodox baptism are not "internet people" as you want to devalue them, don't forget you too are fully Internet people! The matter of the Orthodox Baptism is fountational, primarily, salvatory of importance I cannot quite describe! The Orthodox Baptism is about your salvation, don't kick it and dispise it like this "Internet people"! The request for an Orthodox Baptism doesn't come from the Internet people, is not their invention Taking the Orthodox Faith to Christ so much superficially, is not of any benefit
Pints with Aquinas, where do I get started with reading the early Fathers of the Catholic Church? Aquinas seems too abstract and intellectual to me. I need to have a real understanding of why I believe what I believe.
Thank you Matt! I have been saying that because someone had espoused some things that you don’t believe to be true doesn’t mean that we should absolutely cancel them like the cancel culture has trained us. You should consider,however, if you continue to listen to some voices, if your soul is going in a negative or wrong direction from your core beliefs. At that point you should consider going elsewhere for spiritual benefit.
I am always impressed by the methodical logic and reason of Mr. Lofton. It was a great treat to hear him tell his story, especially on a platform that welcomed him to offer his thoughts and insights.
Great discussion. I was hoping you were going to ask how do you respond to those that say there is a compelling and persuasive argument supporting many different denominations viewpoints and claim to authority.
EDIT: I'm now in the LCMS :) My last comment below explains stuff.
Original: DUDES. I'm Protestant. I've been HEAVILY discerning the Catholic Faith. The transparency of this episode really convicted me. I went to RCIA, not to convert but to really just learn. Every day though, I've been wrestling with the switch. I'm going connect in Cross the Tiber tonight, as soon as I finish this podcast. God bless you gents.
Praying for you! You are always welcome home to Rome. God love you. 🙏🏽😇
Same place over here. May the Lord lead us in truth.
@@rizzogizzo6000 - praying for you too! Come home to Rome. 😇🙏🏽
@@theticoboy thank you. 🙏🏻
Welcome home in advance!!
Please pray for me, I got excommunicated from my protestant church for defending Catholic doctrine (while not even explicitly aligning to the doctrine).
I'm in the process of learning, I'd like to become Catholic if I find it to be the truth.
Praying for you 🙏
Try going to RCIA to learn about Catholicism
Dear Sotem, you are evidently brave and a person of integrity.
I am so sorry for the difficulty you faced in the past.
Sotem, may God bless you, grant you strength and wisdom, and aid you in your pilgrim journey.
@@dwong9289 Thank you for your prayers, sorry for my late response I've missed the notification!
@@tijuthomas259 Thank you for your prayers and support!
I'm currently in process of becoming officially Catholic.
unofficial I'm already Catholic, but there's much to learn.
As a devout Orthodox Christian I have been warring against much of the online Orthodox crowd for over a year now. They are very toxic and do not represent Orthodoxy at all. Great conversation. God bless you guys.
We also have our own toxic Catholics. Nothing much we can do about it. God bless you, 🙏🏾
Greeting. Every group has their own toxic set of people. Whether it is Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, or non-Christians. I've seen plenty of Catholics (particularly of the "rad trad" mentality) act very poorly to others, just as I've seen Orthodox do the same. The best one can do is correct each other. Catholics and Orthodox especially. Both might have their disagreements, but hurling insults is not going to solve anything. It is more productive to charitably debate and dialogue over the issues.
God bless you for being different from them. Lots of love from me!
thank you. I understand you very well, and I appreciate your love for unity and truth. May the Lord bless us all, catholic and orthodox, uniting our hearts and communities so that we may be one Church again, according to Lord's design.
Yeah i'm blessed to have a level headed and wise spiritual father to keep me away from the Internet Orthodox crowd.
I loved this. Lofton’s path is quite similar to mine except I started out as a Mormon, went to Catholicism left because of scandal to orthodoxy and am now going back to Catholicism. I have yet to be baptized but I’m working towards that. Any prayers would be appreciated.
We only have one baptism. If you were never baptized the first time then you never Catholic. If you were baptized by Orthodox priest we accept it but if you were never baptized by a Catholic or Orthodox priest, you need to get baptized as the Church doesn't recognize Mormon baptisms. Might be worth speaking with your priest about this.
and next week youll be a prot and the next a muslim wonder where in a year
Luke! There definitely is a lot of scandal right now in the church but we are on a blip of a 2000 year timeline of the Catholic Church. She has been hard times before and triumphed. If the RCC is the true church, that's all one needs to know. Praying for you now.
Will keep you in my prayers Luke ...that the Holy Spirit will guide you into Christ's one Holy Catholic Church South Dakota USA🙏❤😊
Stay Orthodox bro
Reason&Theology and Pints With Aquinas are the two best channels in Catholic TH-cam.
Totally agree. R&T is legitimate quality. Only other show is add is the Catholic Talk Show.
Sings: “It ain’t necessarily so...” 🎤
I like breaking in the habit as well.
Facts! 💯
I haven't heard of Reason & Theology until now. I'll have to check it out. Thanks for commenting on it.
I’m Protestant at the time, but I love these two guys. I’ve learned so much about Catholic theology from Michael and so much about Catholic compassion and purity from Matt. I’m grateful for these guys. Thank you both for your ministries and faithfulness.
If you're in anything other than Voddie Baucham's church or in one of those rare independent conservative Anglican spinoff parishes, keep coming back here. Over and over and over again. Please keep coming back. And if you especially can find one of those Latin-speaking (or Eastern) Catholic Parishes, or, contrary to the title on here, an Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Parish, go to it, too. The time is not far when we will need to recommune anyway. It is not far at all. But Protestants will not be here to see it.
@@pdstor that’s interesting. I’m confused about the first part though. Could you explain? I want to understand you,
@@pdstor also, the end part. Please explain.
@@pdstor so do you believe Protestants are lost? I won’t be mad if you say yes. Just looking to understand.
@@rizzogizzo6000 I'm with you. I'm not following what is being said with the first and the last comment. It seems like he's saying if you're a conservative-leaning Protestant, stay where you are?
My Mom who is a convert from new age, finished the Bible in 7 and half weeks during lockdown.
She finished reading the Bible thrice in her 7 years of journey into Christianity.
Wow, well done. I recommend Fr Mike's podcast Bible in a Year.
@à la claire fontaine No Im heterosexual. Happily married.
Pray for the unity of the Apostolic churches
Oh, dear God, please, yes, unity 🙏🙏🙏 Jesus prayed that we should be one. I see strengths and weaknesses on both sides and believe that we need each other for balance. I am falling between the two and not fully belonging in either. (technically I'm Catholic) Reunion would be like all my Christmasses came at once. 🙏🙏🙏
I was confirmed in May 2019 after a year or so of wrestling between the EOC and RCC; what finally settled it for me was the absolutely amazing Catholic community in my hometown, with a regular TLM and a fmr-Antiochian Orthodox priest who celebrates a Divine Liturgy under the jurisdiction of the UGCC. I still love to read books by Orthodox saints, have visited a Greek Orthodox monastery, and consider them to be my brothers and sisters in Christ, with whom I have nearly everything in common, in comparison to my Protestant family and friends. My father, who was all his life devoutly Protestant and a Reformed Baptist in the last few decades, he recently begun discerning Orthodoxy - praying for the intercession of St. Josaphat and St. Francis de Sales for his conversion!
@@CatholicHusband Are you a sedevacantist? Cause to call Orthodox not Christian is not in line with what the Church believes, especially V2. God bless.
@@CatholicHusband I understand your hesitancy but you’re suggestions are pretty faulty. They don’t completely reject the Immaculate Conception, they just don’t think it should be dogma(it’s a valid theological opinion in their eyes, yet not endorsed). They still pray for the dead and believes it helps with the purification process after death. They don’t believe 100% in the idea of a physical place of purgatory, but they believe the fundamentals of it. If Gregory Palamas is a polytheist, I guess Melkite Catholics are in heresy since they have him on their calendar(stannmelkitechurch.org/2021/03/18/can-palamism-and-thomism-be-reconciled/). The Orthodox Church even has valid sacraments, although considered illicit, per the Catholic Church. It would pretty weird to say that non-Christians polytheists have valid sacraments. They are our separated brothers in Christ, not polytheistic. They are wrong on Papal Supremacy, Infallibility, and the Filioque. But they still get a lot of things right. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses aren’t Christian, but the EO are. God bless.
@@CatholicHusband no you must be above all a follower of Christ
@@CatholicHusband you need to be baptized, go regularly to the sacraments, have a life of prayer and repentance. Do works of mercy (charity, teach the ignorant, pray for the deceased, etc etc)
@@CatholicHusband for sure i will pray for them.
Baptized and raised methodist. Left the faith till God called me back in at 30. Struggled with denominations till I found calvinism. 8 years later and I understood less at the end than at the start and now I'm in RCIA thank God. Catholicism has really re-energized my thirst for the lord. I think I was getting way past luke warm. Listening to guys like James White praise themselves over and over again in between praise of the reformed saints. It got stale when I found out there was another side to that coin.
These are literally my two favorite channels and hosts.
Tim Gordon had a great episode that touched on Vatican 2 points and how the liturgical and other abuses are outside of it. Was well done.
@@catholicguy2224 I think Tim Gordon is cool but when I heard him call things he disagreed with “gay” I decided to stop watching. There’s no room for irresponsible language like that from Catholics with a platform.
Haha right!!!
This interview was fantastic. One of my favorites. Matt, you’re a great interviewer! Thanks to Michael for sharing his struggles and journey to Catholicism.
The Orthodox Church helped me look at sin as a wound that needs healed, rather than what I had been taught (or as I interpreted) as a much scarier thought, which brought so much fear and dread about going to confession. This change of perspective led me to want to go to confession and look forward to going. I am still RC, but grateful to have had this change in my life, thanks to the Orthodox.
Thanks for sharing this, Barbara! There is so much we have to learn from our Orthodox brothers and sisters, including on the issue of legalism that you mentioned. I just go straight to their saints (half of each we share with them anyway) and leave the internet crowds aside. The Orthodox have such great sacred music and hymns and iconography and such a devotion to Our Blessed Mother that we can really enrich each other instead of trying to find fault with each other. I will never leave Rome, but I can certainly take what is good from Orthodoxy.
@@Athmoneus the eastern catholic churches says hi 😅😬.
@@Athmoneusoh yes....ancestral sin makes so much more sense than original sin....and interestingly Benedict XVI removed Limbo & agreed unbaptised babies go straight to heaven.....that changes the concept of original sin. All good stuff.....except doing U-turns brings the magisterium into question. I feel conflicted and unmoored....falling between the lines. I 🙏 for reunion.
@@fatimahsharpe9113 Fatima - thanks for your comments. I don't see a distinction between ancestral sin and original sin. It is pretty obvious to me that some of the "differences" are more like language issues or differences in emphasis or even matters of plain old theological speculation. Some of our separated brethren unfortunately acquire and reinforce their identity through differentiation from the Catholic faith, but often these squabbles lack real substance and are more of a matter of thought style and they become a very artificial reason to raise walls within apostolic Christianity.
Case in point is the limbo you mentioned. Limbo was never a dogma of the Church, but more of a theological hypothesis that had to do with soteriology, the nature vs. grace issue, etc. So our beloved Pope Benedict XVI did not "remove" anything that was part of the deposit of faith. He just stated that that theological speculation is not very useful. He just advanced the conversation within theology, providing his own opinion on the matter as another theologian, without changing Catholic dogma or binding the faithful to accept his view. You can still be a faithful Catholic and legitimately accept the idea of limbo. It is for God to say who gets to go to heaven. All we can do is pray for the salvation of all.
Perfect interview. Matt, you ask really great questions. I enjoyed it very much.
This was a pretty fire duo- let's see some more collab in the future!
God bless! 🙏
Thank you for having Michael on! Great and knowledgeble guy, best catholic apologetic channel on TH-cam.
Michael, I can see your concern for your family. The anchor for me was the Eucharist, our Blessed Mother, and the Magisterium. So sorry you didn’t find an alternative Catholic parish.
Holy cow. I've never heard so many names and sources cited (by Michael) in such a short span. He dropped position after position of the different groups. A lot of head-scratchers, but still: Amazing.
When confronted with several Catholic priest at my parish that said shocking things and contradicted what is clearly in the Catechism, I went with the Catechism. Stay faithful and let God sort it out. Our new pastor is great so far.
Agree. My local parish has very nice priests but they come out with some heterodox stuff, especially towards the bible.
@@jaqian Any example? I've only heard something like that once years ago; the miracle of loaves and fishes was suggested as maybe just sharing.
Best way to handle it!
Thanks for the link to Reason and Theology. It will definitely become one of my regular stops.
I found this conversation very interesting. Both do an excellent job as usual. Thank you.
-An Orthodox brother in Christ.
EPHRAIM THE SYRIAN
“[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).
Eastern Orthodox Saint
@Lukas M definitely! But the Orthodox Church makes claims that the Bishop of Rome never had primacy over the Church. Well, there favorite Saints believed so.
@@rizzogizzo6000 The Orthodox Church doesn't deny that there was papal primacy in the first millennium of Church history. All bishops are successors of Peter
@@thomashanson7550 well it varies in certain Orthodox camps. Their view of papal primacy is more so that Peter was the first among equals as a mediator or mouth piece of the Church but not as first in charge over the Church, like the right hand to Jesus. But this was the view of a lot of the anti-Nicene fathers. To believe Peter didn’t have authority over the other bishops, would by default, be a rejection of papal primacy. Peter was either over the Church in authority or first in rank but no authority over the other Bishops.
@@thomashanson7550 How was there primacy in the first millennium only? Whay wouldn't all bishops/ apostles in the early church be the same as Peter?
Good grief, this was good...I am a cradle Catholic, and I struggled with my faith for so many reasons. Both Matt and Michael have helped me a lot not giving in to despair and retain the faith which was handed down to me by my parents and grandparents.
I am struggling with a lot of terrible sins and a general sense of lukewarmness, despair and accedia, but folks like you are helping me not to go insane (as many sedevacantists go) or aloof (like many "base" catholics must be feeling like now).
Wonderful interview. Well done, Matt. I appreciate the work you’re doing. Helps me a lot.
Great show guys!
This interview was awesome!!!!!
To be fair a lot of Catholic priests and bishops have suggested to parishioners actions that go against the CCC.
Just few clarifications about Orthodoxy,
Regarding his argument about not having a Pope and thus not having microdogmas about every single aspects of his life,
In Orthodoxy you must follow your spiritual father, during confession he is like talking to Christ, whatever he says that is what you must do, he has the authority to tell you if you should fast or not and give you directions about everything.
And you simply must do that. It's called "ypakoi" (obedience)
Obviously history has shown that this is a vastly superior system because we don't have corrupted Popes changing dogmas and ridiculing the entire Church with their opinions.
Orthodox Churches are self governed, if a priest changes dogma or says things heretical things not backed from the apostles or saints like: " "arsenokites are not in s State of sin"
This doesn't affect the entire church like with Catholicism
The priest will simply be removed and replaced.
But with the Pope history has spoken, very heretical scandalous words have come from ex cathedral
Micro differences in ways of doing things is 100% ok in orthodoxy because we are saved by grace after all, not legalism or our own actions.
We must produce Good fruits in the name of Christ not to be saved by them,
So the legalistic approach is anathema to us.
Anathema
Can you give an example of some "very heretical scandalous words" that have come Ex Cathedra from past Popes?
@@SanctusPaulus1962
How can a priest give blessings to a person that proudly violates basic moral law?
@@jamespong6588 What exactly are you referring to?
@@SanctusPaulus1962 listen brother, I don't want to get into online argumentation with a fellow Christian, nor scandalize you over your faith,
May our Lord show mercy on all of us
@@SanctusPaulus1962I'll give you an example....not exactly scandalous....but it's enough to make you raise an eyebrow. Benedict XVI scrapped Limbo and said unbaptised babies go straight to heaven. Great ! Except that drastically changes the concept of original sin. Good 😃 But in the face of such U-turns how reliable is our magisterium??
Keep up the Catholic Orthodox rivalry please, it's very interesting
Awesome video/interview, I really enjoy Michael's work on the R&T channel.
R&T great channel with some great guys who really know their stuff.
With the Pope blessing same sex marriages Im happy to with my Orthodox brothers 🖤🤌🏼
We need you in the church, we need to stay to heal Her. She needs us too. Our prayers and sufferings, in all humility.
I’ve been strongly considering Catholicism for a while and am currently in RCIA. But I recently began considering Orthodoxy. I def agree with Orthodox theology on some things compared to Latin/Western theology. But I almost immediately began to see the problems inherent in Orthodoxy.
@Ed Thanks for the kinds words of wisdom. Blessings!
Is there a byzantine church around?
In the end it is to be expected that we cannot comprehend every single teaching of 2000 years. This is why it all goes back to the magisterium and the pope.
If you see evidence for the pope being legitimate, you have to be catholic. And the pope is such a clearcut case
Can you please tell me the problems with Eastern Orthodoxy
@@Someone_in_the_world_currently they are in the middle of their own schism between Russia and other churches, they don't have coherent teaching - example - question on Filioque - some orthodox don't see a problem, some see heresy.
Michael is as good as they come!
Is your picture of Vladimir Soloviev? I love that guy. May he rest in peace. Many years!
@@iliya3110 yes, indeed!
His X-Wife & Children might disagree with you. Others too.
Michael didn't address the elephant in the room that the Orthodox church is an ethnic church.
@stopaskingmynamegoogle That is true about Catholicism being an ethnic church of immigrants in America and it continues to be for immigrants but it has adapted well in America because while individual parishes may have an ethnic flair in totality that represent every ethnicity and every language a Catholic and universal representation. Where as in Orthodoxy you have Russian orthodox and Greek Orthodox discouraging their flock from attending each other’s church’s. A Hispanic Catholic can easily attend an Italian ethnic church without scandal. A Greek going to an Russian church good luck with that.
@stopaskingmynamegoogle I don't deny there's truth to that and the fact that most popes have been Italian. Thank God for Vat 2 and the changes that have been made for the past 50 years . I do like Patriarch Bartholomew. He might be the closet to Pope Francis in the Orthodox world.
@@lilwaynesworld0 I am a Canadian of German-Polish Catholic descent and those are two very different traditions.
Yes, same with the "pre-schism" Church. That is the dumbest objection anyone could ever make
@stopaskingmynamegoogle There's a big difference between parishes organized on ethnic lines and whole churches composed of one ethnic group. The Italian, Polish, Irish parishes in the same city were all under the same bishop.
I am a Protestant convert to Orthodoxy. I have zero regrets.
Same
Two Orthodox priests answered the objections in this video at Ancient Faith Today Live
From conception the Church was an OFFICIAL sect within Judaism. If you read Acts 1 and if you are familiar with Halakhah Law you will immediately notice that the Church is a legal entity WITHIN Judaism. There are 3 requirements which are met.
Notice that there are 120 members in this synagogue. Why is this important? It is the exact number of persons in the Halakhah regulations to form a full fledged synagogue. Next according to Halakhah regulations there must be a "beit din" (Hebrew court) formed. We see that there is a beit din and it draws lots and Matthias a disciple is chosen to take over Judas bishopric (episkopen). So two of the three requirements are met.
The third requirement is that there must be a nasi (prince/temporal) and ab ( father/spiritual) appointed. Curiously Peter is filling both these positions in this beit din. Why?
In 190 BC the Kohan Gadol (high priest office) fell into apostasy and beit din gadol cast a vote of no confidence splitting the two offices of the kohan gadol into the "nasi" and the "ab" within the beit din gadol. However, in this new beit din which is actually a beit din gadol (70 disciples) Christ has placed His confidence in Peter by presenting him the Keys to the temple and bringing the two offices back together the way it originally was. The pope has both temporal and spiritual powers. Peter is the prince of the apostles and the pope (Pope meaning papa - meaning father) as you see even today the pope is both nasi and the ab in Catholicism.
Christ appointed Peter as His steward with the keys as per Isaiah 22 vs 19-24. It doesn't mean the other apostles (successors) were/are sidelined, they had/have an equal place, Peter is just First amongst equals. In the davidic kingdoms there was always an al-bayith (steward), that is Peters role.
First book of Kings lists all the Kings and it always has the royal steward/vizier listed next to the King as well because in the absence of the King he was in charge of the Kingdom. The steward is given the sash/robes/keys to the temple because the role is also a priestly role. (Rashi the Jewish sage writes a commentary on the priestly role of the steward/vizier and the keys are the keys of the temple and government.)
Jesus instituted a new temple, reinstated the Melchizedek priesthood in a new davidic kingdom and placed Peter as the steward and the (rock/Cepha). The Eben Shetia the foundation rock of Solomons Temple which the ark lay upon) as in the Talmud, Mishnah and Baraita - the Jews believed that this Eben Shetia rock was placed by God's hand during creation at the very spot that the holy of holies of Solomons Temple was built and from this spot the rest of creation was spread. Jesus by His hand placed the rock/Peter/Cepha in the middle of the pagan Roman Empire and from there this small “cult” destroyed paganism and installed christianity in its place by the power of Christ and it spread throughout the Roman Empire eventually becoming the State religion (a new creation).
In the Talmud it talks about the keys to the First Temple which in the midst of being destroyed the young priests took the keys up a mountain and shouted to God to forgive them for not being able to protect the Temple and they threw the keys towards the sky and a palm reached down and grabbed the keys. So the keys of the temple is not just symbolic.
Jesus knows the Second Temple will be destroyed, He presents the keys to Peter.
What is your ultimate authority that determines who is a heretic? The church fathers? But they don’t all agree on everything. The councils? How do you know that your Church (I’m assuming Eastern Orthodoxy) has all of the councils? How do you know your side didn’t break away from the Church that still possesses the rock of Peter? Eastern Orthodox disagree with each other on a lot of things, and so do Catholics obviously too. But Catholics at least can say they have something to turn to that has the final say. Orthodox don’t have that luxury. There are current schisms in Orthodoxy. If they become permanent, how do you know which side you should stick to? Just a few questions to ponder.
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker Two Paths Orthodoxy & Catholicism by Michael Whelton.
Go read it and you'll see who broke off from who
@@colegest9742 Orthodox broke off.
Very informative, thank you!
And so grateful for the questions that you asked of him to clarify things, thank you!
Love this! These guys are arguably the two heavyweights in Catholic TH-cam! All we need now is Bishop Barron and Fr. Mike Schmitz and we’ll have the Catholic Avengers 😂
Agree with all the aforementioned names with the exception of Bishop Barron. With respect to the Bishop, but he is a modernist whose infamous statement “dare we hope….” Concerning the idea that Hell is empty, is a massive error in his theological reasoning and mortal sin to deny magisterial church teaching.
@@neroresurrected the church never infallibly taught that someone is in hell, the "dare we hope" is not a straight up contradiction to Church teaching, it's a discouraged but acceptible position to have.
Loften is my Hero he convinced me to the go Catholic Church I literally have the exact position as he has..I think a lot of Protestant go EO first because of our strong anti Catholic bias
Exactly. They are going from protestantism to proto-protestantism, to avoid to submit to the Rock of the Church, out of pride and rebellion. They are also temperamentally more suited and totally prepared for the internal in-fighting among the Orthodox.
@@Athmoneus it’s hard the dust and the fog of war is so intense against the church ..when I was convinced of the Catholic Church as the true church I was kicking and screaming…But finally it all made sense..My blessed Mother and her prayers and the the Rosary 📿
@@roshankurien203 Welcome to the Church! With Peter, through Mary, to Christ! Amen! Amen!
Excellent interview lol
It is easy to be united when you only had one Patriarch out of the Pentarchy ;) I find the Russian / Greek argument comforting, very much in the spirit of Paul, Peter and Barnabas. Christ's Church has internally argued and reconciled over and over from the beginning.
Two Orthodox priests responded to this video at Ancient Faith Today Live
Is moskau peter or paul?😄
@@unam9931 i would say the most anti catholic part of the orthodox is precisely the Russian church...
Michael will cross back over, give it time
And then back over the other way, give it more time.. 🤣🤣
Pray for Matt. Strength and refreshment. We're blessed to have him.
Why I converted from Catholicism to Orthodoxy: the Pope is not infallible; the end
Nice interview. I identify with Michael....I myself went from Pentecostal to different permutations of Baptist, to Reformed / Presby, to Lutheran.....and now I m looking at RC as the True Church. My family thinks I've changed too many times too but like Michael I arrived to the next stage by study. I see the Solas as unworkable, so I'm nearly ready. I plan on being married next year so that enters into the decision too. Michael, if you want to connect I'd love to talk for a bit.
When will you have Elijah from R&T on?
Matt I hope that's some german beer that you're pouring in. I only want the best for you brother.
God bless you all. Thanks for great shows
One of the chief driving factors to my reversion and remaining Catholic is the duplicitous nature of Orthodoxy. Great interview.
Been interested in converting and becoming a catholic. Ive watched several of your videos but I just caught on that your name is Matt, I always thought it was Aquinas!! XD But now I realize your podcast is named after Thomas Aquinas, Ha!
No his name is Matt Fradd. Not to be confused with Tom Aquinas. :-)
I would have to agree with Michael on this issue on "guitar liturgy". It's mostly a western modernist issue, a United States issue.
Basing from the Philippines(a south east asian country with some infused western ideology) most of these modern concerns of using instruments aren't really an issue. The guitar has been used solemnly in our parish, and it's truly beautiful.
Most of these issues raised seem to be culture specific, not necessarily theologic nor dogmatic
As michael has raised, dogma has already been addressed by the Church on this one. The problem is just Americans are too entitled to seek obedience 😂 the nature is to disobey and to question, rather than to seek and understand before jumping into conclusions
Two cents!
The guitar liturgy took sway in the West immediately after V2, but because of their distance from Rome, it took some time to reach Asia and Africa. All the gregorian chant or hymns of old were subsequently replaced by clapping and protestantized hymns where all that is said is "we praise you, we thank you". Some parishes are luckier than others, because their priests held firm and did not allow the Mass to become a theatre production. God bless those Asian and African priests.
You are right about these issues being culture specific. If you take a look at India, the land of St. Francis Xavier and St. Thomas, you will see inculturation in full swing now. Gone is the Paschal candle, there are hindu and pagan lamps everywhere. Old timers who resisted receiving the Holy Eucharist from Nuns and laity were not looked upon very kindly. Similar stories can be found in African countries.
Pray for Holy Mother Church to come back to Tradition.
Ave Maria.
Always Americans.
Marketing is their game
In Portugal they keyboard is mostly used to sound like an organ. I saw a parish where they played the violin. All very pious and the chanting is traditional sounding, on feast days usually theres singing in portuguese but the refrains in latin. More agitated music tends to be done by the charismatic movement or the youth groups. It depends.
I agree with you, its cultural. Our Catholic Church is universal, we are from so many different countries...i see several people only taking communion from the Priest. As i do.
Respect and love to all Catholics. Just like you, I believe that every person who sincerely seeks the truth will be guided by God. May I tell why I choose to be in Orthodoxy. Really don't want you to think that I'm an angry Orthodox who came to teach you how to live, or agitate, or anything like that. I just thought about those things which found important and wanted to share.
1. In Catholicism, people usually receive communion with only bread. With bread and wine only for the clergy. But in the Bible,
Christ commands the communion with bread and wine, and Catholic priests do it with bread and wine, but other people only with bread. Why? Why there is difference between clergy and laity, when Christ clearly commanded us to partake with both bread and wine? So disciples did and the early Church. Why do Catholic priests defund their people from communion with the blood of Christ, in contrary to the Gospel? So you can be a Catholic and never in your live take communion with Blood of Christ.
2. In Catholicism, there is a dogma of the inerrancy of the Pope when he speaks "ex cathedra". This contradicts The Holy Scripture saying that there is no-one sinless besides God Himself. The idea that someone (even a monk or bishop)
becomes inerrancy because he was chosen by the council of cardinals (same sinful people), and now standing in the pulpit and saying only the truth just contradicts the Holy Scriptures. Moreover, to demand that all Christians must take everything what this man says as the truth. Sorry, really don't want to offend or sound rude, but this dogma is clearly heresy. What if one day the Pope tells you from the cathedra that he's god himself? Will you believe him according to that dogma of the inerrancy of the Pope?
Catherine of Siena (Catholic saint of 14th century) said, "Even if the Pope were satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom."
What is this if not heresy?
Robert Bellarmine, another Catholic saint, said that if the Pope called the sin a virtue and called the lie the truth, then we should have listened to him (sorry, don't have the exact quote, but you can check it).
Can you see what things it leads to?
In Orthodox Church there is nothing like that, because it's stated that everyone, even the Patriarch, can be mistaken.
3. The dogma in Catholicism that Virgin Mary herself was immaculately conceived. This is not said anywhere in the Bible, nor in the Sacred Tradition.
4. The teaching in Catholicism that a person can have merits before God. What merits can a person have before God? In Orthodoxy (as far as I know), people are saved through the grace of God, their humility and repentance. A person should do good deeds and forgiveness, because he himself asks God for mercy, grace and forgiveness. Therefore, he must treat others in the way he asks God to do unto him. But this is not a merit before God and a means to salvation (as the Catholic Church says, as far as I know). In Orthodoxy, virtues are valued only because humility comes through them.
5. Filioque. According to Orthodox teaching Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (Nicene Creed). In Catholicism it's added, "and from the Son". In Bible Christ clearly says that Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father:
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:" (John 15:26)
Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, and the Son sends Him unto disciples. That is what Jesus Christ says in (John 15:26).
Some people say, "But the Father and the Son are one, therefor Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son". But according to that logic they could've also said that Holy Spirit proceed from Holy Spirit Himself, or as the Father and the Son are one, that the Father is born from Virgin Mary and Holy Spirit, which would be complete nonsense. So why add "and from the Son" when Christ Himself says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father?
Some people point at:
"And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:" (John 20:22)
This place (John 20:22) is not about proceeding the Holy Spirit in eternity. It’s about sending Holy Spirit through the Son from the Father, which happens in time, not in eternity.
The Son sends Holy Spirit from the Father. Holy Spirit comes to the disciples through the Son from the Father, but Holy Spirit doesn't proceed from the Son, He Proceeds from the Father. Bible is very clear about it.
Really hope that I didn't offend anyone or said anything bad, just wanted to share with those things, becasue found them important. Wish the best to everyone!
Sorry your post is way too long, didn't read it all. Point 1, We fully receive both body and blood of Our Lord in either bread or wine. It's not practical to give wine to a few hundred in congregation. Many wouldn't want to receive from the same chalice that 100 others have used. I have received both kinds in a small setting with 20/30 people.
A couple areas of disagreement on your points:
2) "Ex Cathedra" doesn't mean sinless. The Apostles did great signs in Christ's name despite being sinners. In addition, when you say, " Moreover, to demand that all Christians must take everything what this man says as the truth," you are not accurately portraying the Catholic position. The pope does not create dogma and we don't claim that he does. The ability to speak ex cathedra is a separate charism from his everyday pastoral teaching, which is not infallible.
3) Mary is "full of Grace" prior to her accepting the call to be the mother of Jesus; therefore, she was either conceived in a sinless state, or redeemed in the womb and born in a sinless state (St. Thomas' position). You are right: the term "immaculate conception" is not in Scripture, but neither is Trinity or hypostatic union, beliefs you no doubt espouse. However, Mary's sinlessness is espoused early in Sacred Tradition, and I can provide references if you'd like.
4) We can merit Grace from God because He chooses it to be so. Without giving a long explanation, look at the Roman Centurian in Acts ch. 10: God sends St. Peter to the Roman man because God heard the man's prayer AND saw his charity to the poor. This was before his baptism. This shows us that both our Faith (Cornielus' prayer) and our actions (his generosity to the poor) can garnish (i.e. merit) favor with God. When St. Paul teaches against works-based salvation, he is doing so in the context of the old Jewish law.
5) Filioque: This is honestly not a big deal to the everyday believer. It was a theological disagreement that was capitalized upon for political machinations and is now used today by Orthodox to try to discredit the authority of Catholocism. One could go his entire life, be faithful to Christ, attain Salvation, and never know the theological disagreement surrounding the filioque.
Now some questions for Orthodoxy and its lack of central authority:
6) How can you be certain as to the meaning of Scripture without an interpretive authority?
7) How do you reconcile disagreement between and amongst patriarchs?
8) How do you address contemporary issues such as contraception, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, etc. without authority in either Tradition or the contemporary time? In other words, what is your system for resolving novel problems?
@@jaqian Hey, thanks. It's all good, the comment happened to be too long indeed.
But how can you fully receive both body and blood by only one kind, when in fact you receive only bread-body?
In Gospels Christ gives both bread and wine to the disciples and says clearly to receive them. How come that it's okay not to follow Christ's words and invent something different: to give only bread to people claiming that by body they also receive blood? Where does that belief follow from? Christ gave both bread and wine to the disciples, not only bread, right?
To say something like, “let’s just receive one kind, only bread, and we will believe that we received blood too” - is a substitution of Christ’s teaching with people’s verbal invention, which follows from nowhere.
In Orthodoxy they receive communion “by two kinds” and have no problems, it’s practical enough. Christ’s body and blood are so important that people are ready to go to the edge of the world to recieve it.
I’m saying it not to criticize Catholics, not at all, there are so many kind and honest Christians among Catholics. Just can’t understand how it is possible to substitute such an important Christian sacrament in contrary to what Christ taught and showed.
@@phoult37 Hey, thank you for your reply.
3. Trinity is based on the Bible:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." (1st John, 5:7)
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" (Mattew, 28:19)
And the hypostasis too (for example: John 15:26, John Chapter 1)
Just don’t see how from the fact that Mary is full of Grace follows that She was or redeemed in the womb? Then why God didn’t redeemed all other people from sin the same way? Then why the sacrifice of Christ needed?
No doubts that Virgin Mary is the greatest Saint ever lived. Maybe it’s okay to believe privately that she was immaculately conceived, but it’s not right to make it as a dogma and force it on people, because it’s a very disputable thing, not based or mentioned in the Saint Scripture. Many people believe that She is the greatest Saint but was conceived like all other people. Why is it wrong or bad?
2. I didn’t misrepresent it because wrote in the beginning, “when he speaks “ex cathedra”, I was talking in that context. The Catholics don’t believe that the Pope is sinless or never mistaken. But as you don’t believe that the Pope is sinless or infallible in general, why would you believe that he becomes infallible when he stands on the cathedra to speak? On what Biblical teaching is it based? I believe that it’s completely unbiblical dogma.
You’re right that God can do great signs and miracles through sinful people, like the Apostles, Saints, no doubts. But you can’t do it by demand. You can’t just take a Bishop and say, “We choose this man, now he’s our Pope, so he has a charisma and what he says from cathedra is all true”. It’s an unbiblical thing. Christ didn’t give that authority to people to do such things, to endow someone with the ability of guaranteed inerrancy.
What if the Pope will stand "ex cathedra" and start teaching completely heresy and obviously wrong things? Will you follow it or will you agree then that "inerrancy ex cathedra" doesn't work?
4. It’s actually a very big deal, because “Filioque” changes Christ’s words, Who said clearly that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father:
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:" (John 15:26)
"Filioque" misrepresents Trinity changing Christ's words.
To say that it’s not a big deal for everyday believers, isn’t true. It teaches wrong things about Trinity. Everyday believers read Nicene Creed every morning and on every liturgy, so it should be correct. Why should everyday believers read not correct Nicene Creed but a changed one with unbiblicaly changed words which contradict what Christ said about the Holy Spirit?
So it's not right to put blame on Orthodox, who stand for the Creed to be according to the Christ's words about the Holy Spirit.
On your questions (as far as I know about Orthodoxy, just so you know that I might be mistaken on many things):
"How can you be certain as to the meaning of Scripture without an interpretive authority?"
Only the consent of the holy fathers (Church Fathers). If most of the holy fathers agree on it, then it is true, becasue they are led by the Holy Spirit. There isn't such a thing like authority there. One holy father can be mistaken, but not most of them. So need to read the Scripture and check the interpretation with the holy fathers.
"How do you reconcile disagreement between and among patriarchs?"
Nohow. Just pray so that they came to an agreement. Just like the Apostles came to agreement on Jerusalem council (Acts, Chapter 15).
The idea that there can be one Bishop who can always unmistakably reconcile disagreements, we found it as wishful thinking. Better to have a disagreement which can be solved later, then be led by one decision of one person, which can be wrong.
And if something very important, need to call a council.
"How do you address contemporary issues such as contraception, abortion, euthanasia homosexuality without authority in either Tradition or the contemporary time"
All local Orthodox Churches are in agreement on the most of mentioned things. Abortions, homosexuality - just need to open the Bible. Not trying to reject the Bible in favour
of someone's personal authority. The disagreements usually not inside the Church, but between the Church and some secular groups.
There are documents such as "The social concepts of Orthodox Church", where they make statements on those contemporary issues. I don't know about any of major things where different local Orthodox Churches had much different opinions on those things. Even if they had disagreements, it wouldn't be such a big problem as in the case if they all are led by a mistaken decision of one person.
@@ronrontall6370
Yes ur right bro this schismatics can't understand that. God distroyed schismatic Greeks in the hands of tuks for their schism and blasphemy 😝😝😝😝
Maybe you should interview one of us who went from Catholicism to Eastern Orthodoxy.
What was your main reason?
You are wrong. Catholicism is obviously true Christianity.
I went to Eastern Orthodox over catholism, when we left protestantism because of the fruit. There’s a lack of combat, a humility and meekness, that is in the East, that I find nowhere else. We enter our faith without a fight against anyone of anything. The liturgy changes you. Not studying, or arguing a point/points. This is the faith Christ spoke about, I find a true love for Christ I have never ever know…. It boils down to fruit.
@menotyou1161 but that isn’t a logically sound way to reason. If a Buddhist is virtuous is that enough reason to become Buddhist? A combination of sound logic and good fruit is necessary to determine the truth.
@@buckarooben7635 well, I believe the Buddhist don’t have the Holy Spirit indwelling, and as such? Are not capable of growing in the fruit of the Spirit. But can have other spirits indwelling. So we can argue away, but ultimately the question remains. What is the fruit from the East? And what is the fruit of the west? Winning an argument means nothing. Growing in humility is everything
I have left the Catholic church and joined the eastern Orthodox church. I can't get into issues on comments, but too many catholics are trying to explain things away etc. .
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
“Jesus said to Peter, ‘Feed my sheep’. Why does He pass over the others and speak of the sheep to Peter? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir. For this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the others. And also to show him that he must have confidence now that his denial had been purged away. He entrusts him with the rule [prostasia] over the brethren. . . . If anyone should say ‘Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?’, I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that see but of the whole world.” (Homilies on John, 88.1).
John knew Peter’s position amongst the universal Church and the world. And John is one of the Eastern Church’s main Saints. There are a bunch of other quotes but they knew Peters seat and the place of Rome in the Church. I was considering EOC and never considered RCC. But I’m my study of the EOC, I’m know outside of Rome and approaching her gates. History is on Romes side as far as Church history goes. There’s no way around it.
I love your shows! Thank you for spreading our Catholic faiths and believes to people around the world. God bless you 🙏🙏🙏
What s going on in the USA with the Church? So many complaints about modernism. Am I just not well theologically informed to notice it here or am I spoiled with my dedicated Opus Dei priests who answer my questions and help me flourish spiritually. Well I m not flexing but I stay in an Opus Dei student study center, things are different here LOL. I m just grateful to have some good people around me .
Yes, you are just totally spoiled but please enjoy it, and please thank God for this blessing and may you be able to help others too, that you will find on your path. Laudetur Iesus Christus! San Josemaria and Blessed Alvaro del Portillo pray for us!
I take no pleasure in Lofton representing Catholics.
He engages his audience in the most uncharitable way.
There are times he loses it because people in the chat bring up a point that could poke a hole in his argument.
You can see the comments on his page. Unless the person is in complete agreement with him, he is smug and passive-aggressive.
His lack of humility to consider that there is room for differing opinions on some issues.
I finally unsubscribed from his channel.
The virtue of humility is not apparent in his behavior, for certain. He's not even intellectually impressive.
He's just like a librarian assistant. He knows how to source material and parrot it. But he does not apply that knowledge appropriately, judiciously or without bias.
Funny how his nuance always comes down on a predictable Pollyannaish side of an issue.
My Bride 👰🏻 and I have already crossed the Tiber. April 2nd. ❤️🙏🏻📿 thanks be Jesus Christ! Viva Cristo Rey ❤️🙏🏻📿
Great show! Huge fan of you both!
When I came back to the Church after being a Protestant for 40 years, I didn't want to feel like I was just church hopping to another Protestant denomination. That's why I ended up at a parish with a Latin Mass 25 miles from my house rather than the Parish that was 2 miles and another that was 10 miles away.
Wait - so, a priest and certain parishioners had to leave in order for Lofton to feel comfortable going to that parish...?
This seems less like an interview and more of a therapy for Michael Lofton. Not a bad thing tho, it just means the interview is really good, lol.
I really appreciate Michael Lofton posting a lot of videos regarding his journey to solving many ecclesiological problems that I and many people share. Praise to God.
“What’s that chaps name...?”
Cmon bro you know his name.
Best crossover ever.
North Louisiana is still considered “mission country” for the Catholic Church.
Awesome video reason and theology and pints with Aquinas Are my favorite podcasts🙏✝️⛪️🇻🇦💯❤️🇺🇸
I was Catholic for several months, then left for Orthodoxy, where I'm a catachumen. I was married long before becoming Catholic, and my wife is an atheist. She was going to divorce me because I didn't want to have sex without contraception, and because I said that if her gay brother got married, or if our child turned out gay and got married, I wouldn't be able to attend their ceremony. If I attended a gay "wedding" or contracepted, in order to save my marriage, expressing my objections, praying for my wife, and confessing it, could I be forgiven? I really miss Catholicism but I can't live with destroying my marriage and my child's life, and it would be 100% MY fault, not my wife's. We weren't religious when we married/had a baby and she didn't sign up for that.
Maybe save those conversations for if that ever happens to you. My partner is also not interested in faith or church. I have to constantly remind myself to be meek and influenced by my behavior and not through words.
That is a horrible situation but you cannot have your faith compromised by worldly affairs.
This is equal to denying christ before men, causing him to deny you before the father.
If you have true faith in the lord, you accept this as a trial of your faith, and trust god to do the rest
There is noting new under the sun...
Brother Michael thank you for defending us
Bro I'm literally crying right now. I have very similar experience but I'm only on the 1st stage of what he experienced.
There are so many conflicts when I converted to Catholicism (from Pentecostalism). I'm also attracted to Eastern Orthodoxy because I do not feel welcome in the Catholic church, I dont feel I belong here. My reason for converting to RCC is because of intellectual reasons and desire for universal truth and consistency in the church.
Check out the eastern catholic churches... Best of both worlds...
My piece of advice: do not force yourself to stick a given parish if it is leading nowhere. Try other ones in the vicinity, if available I'd advise you give a try to a tridentine community! I keep you in my prayers, hold fast to the end to seize the victor's crown!
Dear Nico, I am sorry to know that you haven't felt like a part of the Catholic Church.
It's unfortunate that you did not see hospitality your parish.
But may I encourage you now, and seek that you slowly find a small group of committed Catholics, who are also hospitable and caring. I suspect with a healthy community life, you may find yourself healed and at home.
May God bless you and aid you in your journey.
Why do you not feel welcome?
I never found community in the catholic church. I suggest you make your own community. What do i mean? Contact like minded catholics through going to retreats and church events. Nourish those acquaintances and friendships. Parishes arent necessarily communities unless youre in a village (european experience here)
that beer stein in the beginning is clearly bottomless... i want one
Jesus did not say, it will be easy! I stopped taking my kids to local church because the priest was too liberal and my kids found find too traditional than priest!
New convert here! What is a "good" confessor?
A "good" confessor is a priest who is gives guidance during confession
I’d say someone who is lovely and direct to the point in the absolution. If he retains the absolution (which is very, very, very rare), then someone who can respectfully explain the reasons. Who doesn’t act like throwing stones at the faithful nor act like indulgently towards sin itself. I’ve heard of priests that said to some people on confession that things are not sins, meaning a “bad confessor” endorses moral relativism. But a moralist and a stone-thrower would never make for a good confessor.
Actually I see many people assuming the sacrament of confession/reconciliation as a synonym of spiritual direction, which it is not. Of course the good confessor should or must give good spiritual advice when needed, but those are occasional interventions. I see many people today thinking the priest should act as a psychologist and a counselor, but that’s not even how spiritual direction should go. If you need, you should ask the priest for spiritual direction. Well, on confessions specifically, the more objective, both gentle and firm but always loving and pious the priest is, always the better. That’s my opinion at least.
Welcome home! God bless your path always, sister!
Just sitting down to watch this video. Watching the hand fill the pint, I looked across to my peppermint crisp Oak milk and pondered my dilemma- Oak or beer, Oak or beer - hmm, why not both!
Wait, Vatican ll isn't filled with modernism? Maybe I need to switch up certain channels I listen to. This was an incredible interview!
Michael has a lot of Vatican II vids on reason and theology. He cites his sources well. Maybe start there?
God bless!
I would strongly recommend you to watch Tim Gordon on this issue too. He even says he (as a more traditionalist Catholic) blamed the Council for many things and got surprises when he went to the very documents of it - so the plain “refusal” (as if it were an option) is nothing but an obstinate position maybe.
@@Maskedlapis64 Thank you, yes I definitely will!
@@brunot2481 I have so much respect for Tim! Tim and TM got me back into the Church in 2019....their time together on TNT was instrumental in that decision. Tim was my favorite, hands-down. I had no idea that he held that position and then changed his mind. I need to really re-think my own position. My mind is kind of blown after watching this....Michael's story resonates strongly with me.
@nikki venable: Sadly, Vatican II is filled with modernism. But the Church will come back to Tradition and the finger pointing b/n Novus Ordo and TLM will cease.
Thank you for this show. The only commented I was disappointed when you said the Trads are not friendly, seeming angry. Perhaps it appears that way to your own personal experience, but Ive been to enough Trad masses and I find parishioners so grateful, prayerful, friendly. Anyway, you cannot generalize. I am happy you found the Parish you feel at home with the Byzatine mass. I wouldnt hesitate to to go to traditional or Byzantine. Pax+
7:25
HE DID THE THING
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
It seems Michael is wrong on Communion in the hand:
"Pope St. Leo the Great (440-461), already in the fifth century, is an early witness of the traditional practice. In his comments on the sixth chapter of the Gospel of John, he speaks of communion in the mouth as the current usage: “One receives in the mouth what one believes by faith” [2]. The Pope does not speak as if he were introducing a novelty, but as if this were a well established fact. A century and a half later, but still three centuries before the practice ( according to the popular account reviewed above) was supposedly introduced, Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604) is another witness. In his dialogues (Roman 3, c. 3) he relates how Pope St. Agapito performed a miracle during the Mass, after having placed the Body of the Lord into someone’s mouth. We are also told by John the Deacon of this Pope’s manner of giving Holy Communion. These witnesses are from the fifth and the sixth centuries. How can one reasonablely say that communion in the hand continued as the official practice until the tenth century? [...] So St. Basil(330-379)says clearly that to receive Communion by one’s own hand is only permitted in times of persecution or, as was the case with monks in the desert, when no deacon or priest was available to give It. “It is not necessary to show that it does not constitute a grave fault for a person to communicate with his own hand in a time of persecution when there is no priest or deacon” (Letter 93, our emphasis). The text implies that to receive in the hand under other circumstances, outside of persecution, would be a grave fault [3]. [...] Thus the Council of Rouen, which met in 650, says, “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or laywomen but only in their mouths.” The Council of Constantinople which was known as in trullo (not one of the ecumenical councils held there) prohibited the faithful from giving Communion to themselves (which is of course what happens when the Sacred Particle is placed in the hand of the communicant). It decreed an excommunication of one week’s duration for those who would do so in the presence of a bishop, priest or deacon."
communion-on-the-tongue.org/articles/009.html
Great video!
I was introduced to Michael Lofton when he introduced when he interviewed a Lutheran pastor. Might be the unintended outcome but he really helped Lutheranism solidify in my life.
Michael Lofton is excellent!
Stay WITHIN the Church and do your just diligence of prayer, fasting and receiving of Sacramdnts.
Read Cdl W.Brandmuller’s writings on the German past Synodal processes since 1975.
Many Catholics I’ve seen on TH-cam seem to think “oikonomia" is some kind of cop-out from legal definitions. I think this fails to appreciate the full depth of “oikonomia.”
This word is exchanged with “stewardship" in the Bible. It means "household management" and designates the "divine plan of salvation" in the New Testament. The same Greek word (oikonomia) is used both for Christ's "plan" in Ephesians and for ministerial stewardship, and it’s cited as being "an imitation of God's love for man" in other orthodox works.
Thus, “housekeeping” in the church is not MERE housekeeping. It is salvation as God sees fit, at the bishop-level, where St. Ignatius says “there is the church.”
Mr.Lofton talks about choosing a religion like it is choosing a gym. From Reformation to Roman Catholicism, after he even (in his words) considered atheism, then Eastern Orthodoxy, and again Roman Catholicism.
And you are not even counting the pre-Reformed stage. I heard him talk about his journey, and there's been quite a few stages before that...
Thank you for sharing your marriage difficulties in the Church. The mixed messages that do no align with church teaching are quite harmful to family and marriage.
In the Orthodox Church we don't rebaptise people, we baptise them!
If you are talking about rebaptism, then this means wherever you came from, that place already had valid priesthood.
The term rebaptism implies two different and separate and valid priesthoods.
So if you come from a place with valid priesthood, why bother with Orthodoxy at all? What's the point!
As for the chrismation on people without Orthodox baptism, that is only harming those chrismated (cause they remain unbaptised) and the Orthodox clerics who carelessly do the service of the Lord
They who asked you to get an Orthodox baptism are not "internet people" as you want to devalue them, don't forget you too are fully Internet people!
The matter of the Orthodox Baptism is fountational, primarily, salvatory of importance I cannot quite describe!
The Orthodox Baptism is about your salvation, don't kick it and dispise it like this "Internet people"!
The request for an Orthodox Baptism doesn't come from the Internet people, is not their invention
Taking the Orthodox Faith to Christ so much superficially, is not of any benefit
Against the pancake dinners? Sacrilege!! 🤦🏼♀️😀
Matt and Mike!
Whatever happened to Matt's five ways of st thomas aquinas book?
Pints with Aquinas, where do I get started with reading the early Fathers of the Catholic Church? Aquinas seems too abstract and intellectual to me. I need to have a real understanding of why I believe what I believe.
45 mins in and im not hearing good aeguments for papacy. Just me?
Above all , there is nothing like the one true Church.
The Holy Catholic Church.
I prefer the holy, catholic and apostolic church but happy you like the Catholic church
May I request a short discussion regarding just the practical matters? There's just so much more to this than theology.
Where do you get the writings of the church fathers nowadays? I have it on Kindle but formatting and text quality isn’t the best.
Thank you Matt! I have been saying that because someone had espoused some things that you don’t believe to be true doesn’t mean that we should absolutely cancel them like the cancel culture has trained us. You should consider,however, if you continue to listen to some voices, if your soul is going in a negative or wrong direction from your core beliefs. At that point you should consider going elsewhere for spiritual benefit.
I am always impressed by the methodical logic and reason of Mr. Lofton. It was a great treat to hear him tell his story, especially on a platform that welcomed him to offer his thoughts and insights.
Great discussion. I was hoping you were going to ask how do you respond to those that say there is a compelling and persuasive argument supporting many different denominations viewpoints and claim to authority.
Lutheran here having a glass of wine so wine and dine with Aquinas